-
International Journal of Environmental... Apr 2021Despite numerous studies evaluating the risk of breast cancer among oral contraception users, the effect of oral contraceptive on developing breast cancer remains... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Despite numerous studies evaluating the risk of breast cancer among oral contraception users, the effect of oral contraceptive on developing breast cancer remains inconclusive. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of literature with meta-analysis in order to quantitative estimate this association. The bibliographic database MEDLINE and EMBASE, and reference lists of identified articles were searched, with no language restrictions, from the start of publication to August 2010. We performed a reanalysis and overall estimate of 79 case-control studies conducted between 1960-2010, including a total of 72,030 incidents, histologically confirmed cases of breast cancer and 123,650 population/hospital controls. A decrease was observed in cancer risk in OC users before age 25 years (0.91, 0.83-1.00). However, the use of OCs before the first full-term pregnancy had a significant increased risk of breast cancer (OR, 1.14, 1.01-1.28, = 0.04), as did OC use longer than 5 years (1.09, 1.01-1.18, = 0.02). Pooled crude odds ratios of breast cancer in ever-users of oral contraceptives was 1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.95-1.07], compared with never-users. There was no significant increase in risk among premenopausal women (1.06, 0.92-1.22), postmenopausal women (0.99, 0.89-1.10), or nulliparous women (1.02, 0.82-1.26). Oral contraceptives do not appear to increase the risk of breast cancer among users. However, OC use before a first full-term pregnancy or using them longer than 5 years can modify the development of the breast cancer.
Topics: Adult; Breast Neoplasms; Case-Control Studies; Contraceptives, Oral; Female; Humans; Odds Ratio; Pregnancy; Risk Factors
PubMed: 33925599
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18094638 -
American Journal of Preventive Medicine Nov 2021Given mixed findings regarding the relationship between long-acting reversible contraception and condom use, this systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizes studies... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Given mixed findings regarding the relationship between long-acting reversible contraception and condom use, this systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizes studies comparing sexually transmitted infection‒related outcomes between users of long-acting reversible contraception (intrauterine devices, implants) and users of moderately effective contraceptive methods (oral contraceptives, injectables, patches, rings).
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Global Health, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for articles published between January 1990 and July 2018. Eligible studies included those that (1) were published in the English language, (2) were published in a peer-reviewed journal, (3) reported empirical, quantitative analyses, and (4) compared at least 1 outcome of interest (condom use, sexual behaviors other than condom use, sexually transmitted infection‒related service receipt, or sexually transmitted infections/HIV) between users of long-acting reversible contraception and users of moderately effective methods. In 2020, pooled ORs were calculated for condom use, chlamydia/gonorrhea infection, and trichomoniasis infection; findings for other outcomes were synthesized qualitatively. The protocol is registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018109489).
RESULTS
A total of 33 studies were included. Long-acting reversible contraception users had decreased odds of using condoms compared with oral contraceptive users (OR=0.43, 95% CI=0.30, 0.63) and injectable, patch, or ring users (OR=0.58, 95% CI=0.48, 0.71); this association remained when limited to adolescents and young adults only. Findings related to multiple sex partners were mixed, and only 2 studies examined sexually transmitted infection testing, reporting mainly null findings. Pooled estimates for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea were null, but long-acting reversible contraception users had increased odds of trichomoniasis infection compared with oral contraceptive users (OR=2.01, 95% CI=1.11, 3.62).
DISCUSSION
Promoting condom use specifically for sexually transmitted infection prevention may be particularly important among long-acting reversible contraception users at risk for sexually transmitted infections, including adolescents and young adults.
Topics: Adolescent; Condoms; Contraception; Humans; Long-Acting Reversible Contraception; Safe Sex; Sexually Transmitted Diseases; Young Adult
PubMed: 34686301
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.04.032 -
Cancers Nov 2021To perform a meta-analysis of case-control studies that addressed the association between oral contraceptive pills (OC) use and breast cancer (BrCa), PubMED (MEDLINE),... (Review)
Review
To perform a meta-analysis of case-control studies that addressed the association between oral contraceptive pills (OC) use and breast cancer (BrCa), PubMED (MEDLINE), Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify case-control studies of OC and BrCa published between 2009 and 2020. We used the DerSimonian-Laird method to compute pooled odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs), and the Mantel-Haenszel test to assess the association between OC use and cancer. Forty-two studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria and we included a total of 110,580 women (30,778 into the BrCa group and 79,802 into the control group, of which 15,722 and 38,334 were using OC, respectively). The conducted meta-analysis showed that the use of OC was associated with a significantly increased risk of BrCa in general, OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.31, = 0.0358. Regarding other risk factors for BrCa, we found that increased risk was associated significantly with early menarche, nulliparous, non-breastfeeding, older age at first parity, postmenopause, obesity, smoking, and family history of BrCa. Despite our conclusion that birth control pills increase the cancer risk being supported by extensive previous studies and meta-analyzes, further confirmation is required.
PubMed: 34830807
DOI: 10.3390/cancers13225654 -
Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) Feb 2021Poor adherence to antihypertensive therapy is a major cause of poor blood pressure (BP) control in patients with hypertension. Regimen simplification may improve... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Poor adherence to antihypertensive therapy is a major cause of poor blood pressure (BP) control in patients with hypertension. Regimen simplification may improve adherence and BP control. This systematic review assessed whether single-pill combination (SPC) therapy led to improved adherence, persistence, and better BP control compared with free-equivalent combination (FEC) therapy in patients with hypertension. PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched until July 2020, in addition to manual searching of relevant congress abstracts from 2014 to 2020 for studies including adults with hypertension aged ≥18 years receiving SPC or FEC antihypertensive therapy measuring any of the following: adherence, persistence, and reductions in systolic BP and/or diastolic BP. Adherence and persistence were summarized in a narrative analysis; direct pair-wise meta-analysis was conducted to compare BP reductions with SPC therapy versus FEC therapy using fixed-effect and random-effects models. Following screening, 44 studies were included. The majority (18 of 23) of studies measuring adherence showed adherence was significantly improved in patients receiving SPCs versus FECs. Overall, 16 studies measured persistence, of which 14 showed that patients receiving SPCs had significantly improved persistence or were significantly less likely to discontinue therapy than patients receiving FECs. Systolic BP (mean difference, -3.99 [95% CI, -7.92 to -0.07]; =0.05) and diastolic BP (-1.54 [95% CI, -2.67 to -0.41]; =0.0076) were both significantly reduced with SPC therapy compared with FEC therapy at week 12. SPC therapy leads to improved adherence and persistence compared with FEC therapy and may lead to better BP control in patients with hypertension.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Hypertension; Medication Adherence; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33390044
DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.120.15781 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Oct 2020Oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) are double agents, which downregulate endogenous concentrations of oestradiol and progesterone whilst simultaneously providing daily... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) are double agents, which downregulate endogenous concentrations of oestradiol and progesterone whilst simultaneously providing daily supplementation of exogenous oestrogen and progestin during the OCP-taking days. This altered hormonal milieu differs significantly from that of eumenorrheic women and might impact exercise performance, due to changes in ovarian hormone-mediated physiological processes.
OBJECTIVE
To explore the effects of OCPs on exercise performance in women and to provide evidence-based performance recommendations to users.
METHODS
This review complied with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A between-group analysis was performed, wherein performance of OCP users was compared with naturally menstruating women, and a within-group analysis was conducted, wherein performance during OCP consumption was compared with OCP withdrawal. For the between-group analysis, women were phase matched in two ways: (1) OCP withdrawal versus the early follicular phase of the menstrual cycle and (2) OCP consumption versus all phases of the menstrual cycle except for the early follicular phase. Study quality was assessed using a modified Downs and Black Checklist and a strategy based on the recommendations of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation working group. All meta-analyses were conducted within a Bayesian framework to facilitate probabilistic interpretations.
RESULTS
42 studies and 590 participants were included. Most studies (83%) were graded as moderate, low or very low quality, with 17% achieving high quality. For the between-group meta-analysis comparing OCP users with naturally menstruating women, posterior estimates of the pooled effect were used to calculate the probability of at least a small effect (d ≥ 0.2). Across the two between-group comparison methods, the probability of a small effect on performance favouring habitual OCP users was effectually zero (p < 0.001). In contrast, the probability of a small effect on performance favouring naturally menstruating women was moderate under comparison method (1) (d ≥ 0.2; p = 0.40) and small under comparison method (2) (d ≥ 0.2; p = 0.19). Relatively large between-study variance was identified for both between-group comparisons ([Formula: see text] = 0.16 [95% credible interval (CrI) 0.01-0.44] and [Formula: see text] = 0.22 [95% CrI 0.06-0.45]). For the within-group analysis comparing OCP consumption with withdrawal, posterior estimates of the pooled effect size identified almost zero probability of a small effect on performance in either direction (d ≥ 0.2; p ≤ 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
OCP use might result in slightly inferior exercise performance on average when compared to naturally menstruating women, although any group-level effect is most likely to be trivial. Practically, as effects tended to be trivial and variable across studies, the current evidence does not warrant general guidance on OCP use compared with non-use. Therefore, when exercise performance is a priority, an individualised approach might be more appropriate. The analysis also indicated that exercise performance was consistent across the OCP cycle.
Topics: Athletic Performance; Contraceptives, Oral; Exercise; Female; Humans
PubMed: 32666247
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-020-01317-5 -
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology Apr 2020Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is a condition with increased intracranial pressure of unknown etiology. Its presenting symptoms include persistent headache,...
BACKGROUND
Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is a condition with increased intracranial pressure of unknown etiology. Its presenting symptoms include persistent headache, pulsatile tinnitus, and visual obscuration. It tends to occur in obese women of childbearing age, and its greatest risk is irreversible loss of vision. Some of the commonly used medications in dermatology, especially those for acne vulgaris, have been associated with IIH. However, the creation of specific risk categories for drugs as a guide for clinicians has never been performed.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to critically assess all published cases of IIH and identify high-risk drugs associated with drug-induced intracranial hypertension (DIIH), to assist dermatologists and other physicians with patient education and monitoring of symptoms of secondary intracranial hypertension.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Review Databases were searched for all cases of IIH thought to be drug-related between January 1900 and June 2019. A total of 5117 articles were identified, and 235 articles were found to be relevant. All cases were assessed to satisfy the modified Dandy criteria for diagnosis of IIH, and the likelihood of each case being a 'definite' adverse drug reaction (ADR) was determined using the Koh algorithm for ADR. An association category (from weakly associated [Category I] to strongly associated [Category V]) was assigned based on the number of cases meeting these two criteria.
RESULTS
There were 259 verifiable cases of DIIH. Vitamin A derivatives, tetracycline-class antibiotics, recombinant growth hormone, and lithium were found to be most strongly associated with DIIH (Categories IV and V). Corticosteroids were moderately associated with DIIH (Category III). Drugs that were weakly associated with DIIH (Categories I and II) include cyclosporine, progestin-only contraceptives, combined oral contraceptives, second- and third-generation fluoroquinolones, sulfenazone, gonadotropin-releasing hormones and luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist, nalidixic acid, amiodarone, stanozolol, danazol, divalproic acid, sulfasalazine, ketoconazole, and ustekinumab.
CONCLUSION
We suggest using the term 'drug-induced intracranial hypertension' (DIIH) and propose a set of diagnostic criteria for DIIH. Our review attempts to identify DIIH-associated drugs based on a strict diagnostic and drug-causality algorithm, then stratify them into appropriate risks categories. This may ultimately assist physicians in counselling patients about the risk of DIIH when prescribing medications and recognizing this uncommon yet sight-threatening condition.
Topics: Dermatologic Agents; Humans; Intracranial Hypertension
PubMed: 31741184
DOI: 10.1007/s40257-019-00485-z -
Clinical Drug Investigation May 2020The levonorgestrel oral emergency contraceptive is well tolerated and effective, however its use is still limited, mainly due to safety concerns. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The levonorgestrel oral emergency contraceptive is well tolerated and effective, however its use is still limited, mainly due to safety concerns.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize current evidence regarding the adverse events, and their prevalence, reported during the use of oral levonorgestrel emergency contraceptives.
METHODS
Four electronic databases and the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Public Dashboard were searched. Studies that reported or investigated safety outcomes or adverse reactions during the use of levonorgestrel as an emergency oral contraceptive were included. Data on study design, demographics of levonorgestrel and the control cohort, and reported adverse effects were extracted.
RESULTS
A total of 47 articles were included in this systematic review, from which it was shown that most of the adverse reactions were common and not serious. Uncommon adverse reactions identified included anorexia, ectopic pregnancy, exanthema, chloasma, miscarriage, and weight gain. Multiple serious adverse events, including convulsion, ectopic pregnancy, febrile neutropenia, stroke, abdominal hernia, anaphylaxis, cancer, ovarian cyst rupture, serious infections, and suicidal ideation, were reported. In addition, the prevalence of adverse events after a levonorgestrel 0.75 mg two-dose regimen and a levonorgestrel 1.5 mg single-dose regimen were not statistically different (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
The most common adverse effects of levonorgestrel were not serious. This systematic review shows that data regarding the adverse reactions of repeated use of levonorgestrel are scarce. Studies on the multiple uses of levonorgestrel emergency contraception are still required to ensure its safety.
Topics: Contraceptive Agents, Hormonal; Contraceptives, Postcoital; Female; Humans; Levonorgestrel; Pregnancy
PubMed: 32162237
DOI: 10.1007/s40261-020-00901-x -
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Apr 2020BRCA mutation carriers have an increased risk of developing breast or ovarian cancer. Oral contraception (OC) is known to increase breast cancer and reduce ovarian... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
BRCA mutation carriers have an increased risk of developing breast or ovarian cancer. Oral contraception (OC) is known to increase breast cancer and reduce ovarian cancer risk in the general population. This review analyses the published data on OC and risk of cancer in BRCA mutation carriers.
METHODS
We included all relevant articles published in English from 1995 to 2018. Literature was identified through a search on PubMed and Cochrane Library.
RESULTS
We included four meta-analyses, one review, one case-control study and one retrospective cohort study on the association between ovarian cancer and OC in BRCA mutation carriers. All report a risk reduction for the OC users and several also describe an inverse correlation with duration of use. Regarding breast cancer, we included four meta-analyses, one review, one case-control study, two case-only studies, one prospective and one retrospective cohort study. Some studies report a risk elevation, while others did not find an association between OC use and breast cancer in BRCA mutation carriers. In other studies, the association was limited to early-onset breast cancer and/or associated with young age at first start of OC.
CONCLUSION
Oral contraception leads to a risk reduction of ovarian cancer also in BRCA mutation carriers. An increase in breast cancer risk due to OC cannot be excluded. Women with BRCA mutation who consider OC use have to be informed about possible increase in breast cancer risk and alternative contraceptive methods. OC should not be used for the prevention of ovarian cancer in this population.
Topics: Adult; Breast Neoplasms; Case-Control Studies; Contraceptives, Oral; Female; Humans; Mutation; Ovarian Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 32140806
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-020-05458-w -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2020Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) is a liver disorder that can develop in pregnancy. It occurs when there is a build-up of bile acids in the maternal blood. It... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) is a liver disorder that can develop in pregnancy. It occurs when there is a build-up of bile acids in the maternal blood. It has been linked to adverse maternal and fetal/neonatal outcomes. As the pathophysiology is poorly understood, therapies have been largely empiric. As ICP is an uncommon condition (incidence less than 2% a year), many trials have been small. Synthesis, including recent larger trials, will provide more evidence to guide clinical practice. This review is an update of a review first published in 2001 and last updated in 2013.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of pharmacological interventions to treat women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, on maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (13 December 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials, including cluster-randomised trials and trials published in abstract form only, that compared any drug with placebo or no treatment, or two drug intervention strategies, for women with a clinical diagnosis of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and risks of bias. We independently extracted data and checked these for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 26 trials involving 2007 women. They were mostly at unclear to high risk of bias. They assessed nine different pharmacological interventions, resulting in 14 different comparisons. We judged two placebo-controlled trials of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) in 715 women to be at low risk of bias. The ten different pharmacological interventions were: agents believed to detoxify bile acids (UCDA) and S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe); agents used to bind bile acids in the intestine (activated charcoal, guar gum, cholestyramine); Chinese herbal medicines (yinchenghao decoction (YCHD), salvia, Yiganling and Danxioling pill (DXLP)), and agents aimed to reduce bile acid production (dexamethasone) Compared with placebo, UDCA probably results in a small improvement in pruritus score measured on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) (mean difference (MD) -7.64 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -9.69 to -5.60 points; 2 trials, 715 women; GRADE moderate certainty), where a score of zero indicates no itch and a score of 100 indicates severe itching. The evidence for fetal distress and stillbirth were uncertain, due to serious limitations in study design and imprecision (risk ratio (RR) 0.70, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.40; 6 trials, 944 women; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.37; 6 trials, 955 women; GRADE very low certainty). We found very few differences for the other comparisons included in this review. There is insufficient evidence to indicate if SAMe, guar gum, activated charcoal, dexamethasone, cholestyramine, Salvia, Yinchenghao decoction, Danxioling and Yiganling, or Yiganling alone or in combination are effective in treating women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
When compared with placebo, UDCA administered to women with ICP probably shows a reduction in pruritus. However the size of the effect is small and for most pregnant women and clinicians, the reduction may fall below the minimum clinically worthwhile effect. The evidence was unclear for other adverse fetal outcomes, due to very low-certainty evidence. There is insufficient evidence to indicate that SAMe, guar gum, activated charcoal, dexamethasone, cholestyramine, YCHD, DXLP, Salvia, Yiganling alone or in combination are effective in treating women with cholestasis of pregnancy. There are no trials of the efficacy of topical emollients. Further high-quality trials of other interventions are needed in order to identify effective treatments for maternal itching and preventing adverse perinatal outcomes. It would also be helpful to identify those women who are mostly likely to respond to UDCA (for example, whether bile acid concentrations affect how women with ICP respond to treatment with UDCA).
Topics: Charcoal; Cholagogues and Choleretics; Cholestasis; Cholestyramine Resin; Dexamethasone; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Female; Fetal Distress; Galactans; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Mannans; Plant Gums; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pruritus; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; S-Adenosylmethionine; Stillbirth; Ursodeoxycholic Acid
PubMed: 32716060
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000493.pub3 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Jan 2020Resistance training is well known to increase strength and lean body mass, and plays a key role in many female athletic and recreational training programs. Most females...
BACKGROUND
Resistance training is well known to increase strength and lean body mass, and plays a key role in many female athletic and recreational training programs. Most females train throughout their reproductive years when they are exposed to continuously changing female steroid hormone profiles due to the menstrual cycle or contraceptive use. Therefore, it is important to focus on how female hormones may affect resistance training responses.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review is to identify and critically appraise current studies on the effect of the menstrual cycle and oral contraceptives on responses to resistance training.
METHODS
The electronic databases Embase, PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science were searched using a comprehensive list of relevant terms. Studies that investigated the effect of the menstrual cycle phase or oral contraceptive cycle on resistance training responses were included. Studies were also included if they compared resistance training responses between the natural menstrual cycle and oral contraceptive use, or if resistance training was adapted to the menstrual cycle phase or oral contraceptive phase. Studies were critically appraised with the McMasters Universities Critical Review Form for Quantitative Studies and relevant data were extracted.
RESULTS
Of 2007 articles found, 17 studies met the criteria and were included in this systematic review. The 17 included studies had a total of 418 participants with an age range of 18-38 years. One of the 17 studies found no significant differences in acute responses to a resistance training session over the natural menstrual cycle, while four studies did find changes. When assessing the differences in acute responses between the oral contraceptive and menstrual cycle groups, two studies reported oral contraceptives to have a positive influence, whilst four studies reported that oral contraceptive users had a delayed recovery, higher levels of markers of muscle damage, or both. For the responses to a resistance training program, three studies reported follicular phase-based training to be superior to luteal phase-based training or regular training, while one study reported no differences. In addition, one study reported no differences in strength development between oral contraceptive and menstrual cycle groups. One further study reported a greater increase in type I muscle fibre area and a trend toward a greater increase in muscle mass within low-androgenic oral contraceptive users compared with participants not taking hormonal contraceptives. Finally, one study investigated androgenicity of oral contraceptives and showed greater strength developments with high androgenic compared with anti-androgenic oral contraceptive use.
CONCLUSIONS
The reviewed articles reported conflicting findings, and were often limited by small participant numbers and methodological issues, but do appear to suggest female hormones may affect resistance training responses. The findings of this review highlight the need for further experimental studies on the effects of the menstrual cycle and oral contraceptives on acute and chronic responses to resistance training.
Topics: Body Composition; Contraceptives, Oral; Female; Humans; Menstrual Cycle; Muscle Strength; Resistance Training
PubMed: 31677121
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-019-01219-1